How to think your way through one of my quizzes!
Step one: it helps to become a paying subscriber to my Substack so that you've got the lesson under your belt before you attempt the quiz. Anyway, the quizzes themselves are interactive and free—open to the public, so you don't need to become a subscriber to take the quizzes. The following is taken from my most recent quiz, Verbs: Part 9.
__________
REASONING: In the relevant lesson (which has the same title as the quiz), you learn that the past-perfect tense is used for past events before other past events.
Remember:
present-perfect tense: I have done it. (past tense, with helping verb in the present tense)
past-perfect tense: I had done it. (helping verb is in the past tense)
A perfect tense means the action is completed.
First possible answer: No. I was quietly cleaning my guns is an ongoing, background action in the past. [T]he robbers unwisely broke in is a sudden action, also in the past, that happens while the background action is still occurring, i.e., at the same time. This is therefore not a past action before another past action.
Second possible answer: Yes. Before 1860 refers to a bygone era. American society had been moving toward civil war is a past occurrence before 1860. Past perfect is justified. The American Civil War officially started in 1861.
Third possible answer: Yes. Past action: ...aunt suddenly ran out on us. Past action before that past action: ...she had left me a note for you. Past perfect is justified.
Fourth possible answer: No. Your future achievements will is a reference to the future. The phrase all of your mom's past hopes is not a past action before another past action.
REASONING: When you hear future continuous, you should be on the lookout for a future marker like will or won't. You should also be looking out for the continuous marker -ing. Where do you see both of those markers for an action that takes time in the future?
First possible answer: Yes. The verb will be seeing has all the marks of the future-continuous tense (a.k.a. the future progressive).
Second possible answer: No. She is betting is the present continuous tense, not the future-continuous tense.
Third possible answer: No. We're going to win is the near-future or intentional tense (see this reference, #3). Don't be fooled by the -ing in going. There's no will or won't there, nothing to indicate the future. True, the phrase we behead is the grammatical present tense even though the after means the beheading is a future action. Despite that, there's no indication of a future action that takes time.
Fourth possible answer: No. They'll know is the future simple (or the simple future). The phrase the teams come around is, grammatically, the simple present but refers to a future action. Using some form of the present tense to talk about the future is a thing we do in English (We're going to England next year before it disappears—understood to be a future action), but that's a whole 'nuther discussion.
What verb aspects do you see above (and in the correct order)?
REASONING: The aspect of a verb = simple, progressive, or perfect (and sometimes conditional). A simple aspect basically means that the action occurred, is occurring, or will occur in the time frame of the verb tense. Use the progressive aspect when the action takes time. Use the perfect aspect when the action is completed. This is a minor point, but use the conditional (would) for hypothetical, imagined, or fanciful futures (or as I put it in the lesson: hypothetical, conditional, or volitional).
Special note: The present-perfect tense (You've grown!) indicates a completed action that still has a connection with or relevance to the present. Saying "You grew!" is different from saying "You've grown!" In the second case, the speaker is comparing your past size to your current size. In the first case, the speaker is merely stating a fact.
simple past (or past simple): He ate her brain.
simple present: He eats brains.
simple future: He will eat her brain.
past progressive (or continuous): He was eating her brain.
present progressive: He is eating her brain.
future progressive: He will be eating her brain.
past perfect: He had eaten her brain.
present perfect: He has eaten her brain.
future perfect: He will have eaten her brain.
Okay, let's discuss the answers to this question.
First possible answer: Yes. The first verb, was pronouncing, is in a progressive tense. The next two verbs, killed and ate, are in the simple-past tense (also called the preterite). The verb will have killed is in a perfect tense—specifically, the future perfect.
Second possible answer: No. As explained above.
Third possible answer: No. As explained above.
Fourth possible answer: No. As explained above.
REASONING: The phrase Next week clues you in to the fact that this sentence refers to a future action or state of affairs. The participle solved probably indicates a completed action. So—a future completed action has to be in the future-perfect tense.
First possible answer: No. The verb wouldn't have solved is in the conditional past.
Second possible answer: Yes. The verb will have solved is in the future perfect.
Third possible answer: No. The auxiliary will have been would require a participle ending in -ing—will have been solving. Progressive, not perfect. Besides, the sentence says solved.
Fourth possible answer: Yes. This is, like the second answer, the future-perfect tense.
REASONING: My lesson discusses the four standard dimensions of a verb: person, number, tense, and aspect. I mention a possible fifth dimension, mood, but give reasons for why it's probably not one of the dimensions of a verb: Grammatical mood normally takes into account the tone and tenor of the whole sentence, not just the verb(s).
First possible answer: Yes. Explicitly mentioned as a standard dimension of a verb.
Second possible answer: No. As discussed above.
Third possible answer: Yes. Explicitly mentioned as a standard dimension of a verb.
Fourth possible answer: Yes. Explicitly mentioned as a standard dimension of a verb.
__________
And that, friends, is how you reason your way through one of my quizzes. You might have your own way of doing things, and that's fine. I'm pretty libertarian about methods: As long as you're not eating anyone's brain, your method is probably fine.
No comments:
Post a Comment
READ THIS BEFORE COMMENTING!
All comments are subject to approval before they are published, so they will not appear immediately. Comments should be civil, relevant, and substantive. Anonymous comments are not allowed and will be unceremoniously deleted. For more on my comments policy, please see this entry on my other blog.
AND A NEW RULE (per this post): comments critical of Trump's lying must include criticism of Biden's or Kamala's or some prominent leftie's lying on a one-for-one basis! Failure to be balanced means your comment will not be published.